Metabolic and Energy Cost of Sitting, Standing, and a Novel Sitting/Stepping Protocol in Recreationally Active College Students.

The purpose of this study was to compare the differences in metabolic and energy cost (MEC) of college students while seated, standing, and during a sitting/stepping protocol. Participants were assessed via indirect calorimetry for 20 min in each of the following conditions: 1) seated in a standard office chair, 2) standing in place, and 3) a sitting/stepping protocol in which participants performed 1 min of stepping in place at 90 bpm, sat for 9 min, then repeated the stepping and sitting sequence once more. Participants completed each of the 3 trials in the aforementioned order, preceded with a 3 min acclimation period in each condition. A significant difference in MEC was observed between the 3 conditions, p < 0.001. Pairwise comparisons indicated that the sitting/stepping protocol resulted in significantly greater MEC than the seated and standing conditions (p < 0.001). Additionally, the standing protocol resulted in significantly greater MEC than the seated protocol (p < 0.001). The significant differences and large effect sizes between conditions indicate that interspersing sedentary bouts with brief activity can substantially increase MEC. Broader application of these findings may provide health promotion professionals with novel strategies to reduce sedentary behavior and improve health.

Occupational Sitting and Physical Activity Among University Employees.

The prevalence of overweight and obese in the U.S. has been thoroughly documented. With the advent of inactivity physiology research and the subsequent interest in sedentary behavior, the work environment has come under closer scrutiny as a potential opportunity to reverse inactivity. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to determine the sitting and physical activity (PA) habits among different classifications of university employees. University employees (n=625) completed an online survey based on the Occupational Sitting and Physical Activity Questionnaire (OSPAQ). Participants were instructed to describe time spent sitting, standing, walking, and in heavy physical labor during the last seven days, along with the number of breaks from sitting taken per hour. To establish habitual patterns of PA outside of work, employees recalled their participation in structured PA in the past seven days. Prior to data analysis, employees were categorized as Administration, Faculty, Staff, or Facilities Management. Statistically significant differences were found among employee classifications for min sit/d, p<.001; min stand/d, p<.001; min walk/d, p<.001; and min heavy labor/d, p<.001. No significant differences were found for breaks/h from sitting, p=.259 or participation in structured PA, p=. 33. With the exception of facilities management workers, university employees spent 75% of their workday seated. In conjunction with low levels of leisure time PA, university employees appear to be prime candidates for workplace interventions to reduce physical inactivity.